School Choice: Private Schools A-M

Sen. Mark Udall proposes limits to government's surveillance

U.S. Sen. Mark Udall, concerned that rights are being trampled, says "terrorism has forced us to have a conversation about our civil liberties." (Andy Cross, The Denver Post)

WASHINGTON — Sen. Mark Udall will introduce legislation that would greatly reduce the federal government's ability to collect data on Americans' phone calls without a demonstrated link to terrorism, his office told The Denver Post on Thursday.

The bill, to be formally introduced next week, would likely curtail current federal government programs that monitor Americans' phone and e-mail communications.

The programs' existence, known by Udall for years because of his position on the Senate Intelligence Committee, were unveiled in news reports last week. The federal government has called the massive dragnet of communications and call records lawful, citing a "secret interpretation" of the Patriot Act.

Udall will co-sponsor his bill with another outspoken Democrat on the Senate Intelligence Committee, Oregon Sen. Ron Wyden.

"The NSA's collection of millions of Americans' phone call records is the type of overreach I have warned about for years," Udall said. "This legislation strikes the right balance in protecting our homeland while also respecting our Constitution."

Whether the bill has any viability is yet to be determined, but Capitol Hill seems ripe for debate on the issue.

Countering Udall and Wyden, California Democratic Sen. Dianne Feinstein, the chair of the Senate Intelligence Committee, has called the information collected "lawful" and necessary to keep the nation safe.

Advertisement

"The threat from terrorism remains very real, and these lawful intelligence activities must continue," she said, in a joint statement with her Republican colleague Sen. Saxby Chambliss of Georgia. "This law does not allow the government to listen in on the content of a phone call."

The Udall-Wyden proposed bill would require a presidential administration to furnish specific evidence to a judge — likely in a Foreign Intelligence Surveillance court — that there are credible reasons to believe a person is linked to terrorism or espionage before officials could broadly collect phone records.

Presently, federal officials are casting a much broader net.

Thirteen senators, including Udall, earlier this week sent a letter to the new Privacy and Civil Liberties Oversight Board, which oversees the executive branch's "efforts to protect the country from terrorism," calling the news reports detailing the surveillance programs "troubling."

The group called for more transparency.

"We ... ask that you provide an unclassified report on these issues, so that the public and the Congress can have a long-overdue debate about these important privacy concerns," the letter said.

New Mexico Democratic Sen. Martin Heinrich said he "expected our intelligence community to act not just within the letter of the law but to respect Americans' expectations of privacy."

Udall said that the Obama administration's assertion that the domestic surveillance on Americans is a critical tool in protecting the nation does "not hold up under close scrutiny."

Gen. Keith B. Alexander, head of the National Security Agency and U.S. Cyber Command, testified this week the collection of phone records averted "dozens of terrorist attacks."

Sen. Dan Coats, an Indiana Republican who also sits on the Intelligence committee, said through a spokeswoman he feared Udall's bill would "add duplicative standards to an already highly scrutinized judicial process" and could "make our law enforcement and intelligence community less effective."

Udall and Wyden called the testimony dubious based on what they know from their own classified Intelligence briefings.

"We have not yet seen any evidence showing that the NSA's dragnet collection of Americans' phone records has produced any uniquely valuable intelligence," Udall and Wyden said in a joint statement. "The public deserves a clear explanation."

Seth Masket, chairman of political science at the University of Denver, said it was unclear whether the public was going to push for a massive debate on the issue in Washington.

"This doesn't seem to be an issue that voters are terribly incensed about. There doesn't seem to be any specific abuses," Masket said. "I think there is a pretty substantial move into people's privacy here, but it doesn't appear to be against the law, and people have a hard time pointing to any specific harm that has come as a result ... People are still in post-911 mind-sets that some freedoms have to be surrendered."

Udall
is expected to make an appearance on Sunday's Meet the Press to talk about his proposed bill.